JFDenmark Posted July 15, 2006 Share Posted July 15, 2006 Mr. Kettler does touch an interesting topic. The front part of the LEO2 above the driver was indeed proven to be a critical spot. Not so much because of ricochets, which I have never heard of, but more because of large HE rounds bursting just above the driver. It was found that this could cause the drivers periscopes to "explode" inwards into the driving compartment, thereby killing or disabling the driver. This was rectified on the LEO2A5 and A6 by removing the traditional periscopes and adding flip-down mirrors. It´s quite clever and works extremely well. The ricochet thing has already been covered plenty, so I´ll just say that the frontal armour on a LEO2A5/6, althoug extremely sloped, is actually hollow and designed mainly to defeat HEAT rounds, so APFSDS would penetrate the outer armour and be stopped by the main armour further in. As for EFP, in order for those rounds to defeat tanks they would have to be extremely large and thus very hard to hide, but I know from personal experience that they can penetrate less armoured vehicles quite easily. The drawback here is that less armour means less spalling, which again means that you have to literally be right in the path of the EFP or it probably will not kill you. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
seel38 Posted July 22, 2006 Share Posted July 22, 2006 I think that the issue is not that the ring may be a weak point, that can only be proven by an enemy that has a large supply of powerful AT weapons and the Iraqi's(I should say insurgents) simply don't have them. The insurgents can concentrate on a far more vunerable spot the underside. Far easier to triple stack AT mines and wait for one to come to you than try and chase one down and hit it in a weak spot. My point being is that without many shots from powerful AT projectiles you won't know if it is a weak spot, the military will not tell you and Iraq is not a good sampling of powerful AT projectile hits. I'm sure even the soldiers that operate the M1 could not tell you. I'll just say that the M1 is one bad bitch and the guys that drive them over there are even badder! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M1A1TC Posted July 22, 2006 Share Posted July 22, 2006 I could tell you what are the weak spots, but I am not allowed to Cant wait to make a mod of my old unit 2-69 3rd ID [ July 22, 2006, 05:14 AM: Message edited by: M1A1TankCommander ] 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hellfish Posted July 22, 2006 Share Posted July 22, 2006 I wonder if we could simulate pouring water into the air intake on the Abrams - I've seen that kill many a mighty tank. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dixon_el Posted July 23, 2006 Share Posted July 23, 2006 Generally using Sabot on thin skinned AFVs is a good waste of ammo. The penetration, except at very close range, blows thru, causing spaul damage but very little else. I personally know a couple of guys that were in light vehicles that were punched by Sabot. One of them was burned on the arm, neck and cheek by spaul and the other one escaped with only a ruptured ear drum. While a High quality Sabot is deadly, the type of Sabot used in Soviet-Bloc weapons thens to be of poorer quality. I talked to a Captain, whose company stumbled into a hulldown Iraqi company equiped with T72s. One of his tanks was hit 7 times at close range and after the battle (US 1 - Iraqi 0) the tank was battle rigged and limped away with the crew intact. Sabot on target doesn't mean a sure kill, particularily if you're using inferior equipment. Cool, rules 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.